Session 1: Money Revenue Generation

Session: 1

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: Money Revenue Generation

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Simon and James (Stantec)

Summary

• The focus of the discussion is how to increase revenue from transport facilities. Public transport will be assisting movement for people and be free to use.

• Public transport expenses are significant for operation and maintenance.

• The primary opportunity lies in congestion pricing, proper pricing for parking, and fare payment encouragement.

• The City of Melbourne receives a significant proportion from on-street parking, and shared car facilities. Encourage Public transport use has been provided by reducing discounts on particular days of the week, and discounts for a group of people.

• Maximising asset utilisation.

Session 1: Car Dependency

Session: 1

Room: Melbourne Room

Session Title: Car Dependency

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Sebastian Aurisano

Summary

• Main Problems: Traffic jams, pollution, climate change. 25% of emissions come from transport.

• How to tackle it? Public transport, active transport, infrastructure. The pedestrian-oriented built environment is most critical. Autonomous and electric vehicles should also be considered. Electric vehicles tend to tackle pollution and climate change, but congestion will still remain.

• AVs might improve traffic jams but they may encourage urban sprawl.

• Car dependency has a gender impact, mothers need cars to take kids around. We can only use happy wheels if the urban built environment supports it.

• Minimum parking requirements based on floor area ratio should be reconsidered.

• Car sharing is important to diminish the parking issues related to autonomous vehicles.

• Private e-scooters should be allowed and encouraged in Melbourne.

Session 3: Zero Traffic Growth with Increasing Population

Session: 3

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: Zero Traffic Growth with Increasing Population

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Lisa (DoT)

Summary

• The community complains about inadequate parking, yet people are aware of the traffic congestion.

• Consider a defined restriction for parking per household.

• Policy needs to be specific.

• Considered the opportunity of car sharing.

• How can we support younger generations and public transport use?

• We need to allow for time to see the behavioural change as infrastructure and restrictions will not radically change the car-dependent scenario.

• Restricting owning a car until a certain age could also be a way to ownership control.

Session 3: Active Transport Integration

Session: 3

Room: Melbourne Room

Session Title: Active transport integration

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Danny Davis

Summary

• FLAIR: Flexible, local, accessible, integrated, and responsive.

• Accessibility in stations should be increased.

• High patronage for better bus stops.

• App-based information needs to be reliable.

• Multimodal journey app timetable should be user-friendly.

• Sharing data between companies will increase journey reliability.

Session 4: How can we reduce parking with car sharing?

Session: 4

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: How can we reduce parking with car sharing?

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Darcy (GoGet)

Summary

• Carshare facilitates placemaking and intermodal transport.

• Consider Peel Street where curbside parking slots were replaced by bike lanes.

• Users drive 50% less than before they joined the service. Increase access, and reduce costs/VKT. Car-sharing to tackle last-mile issues.

• 4 Key Benefits of onsite carshare -> reduce project costs (1 parking space $50k-$100k), improve project delivery timelines, reduce environmental impact and provide amenities to the local community.

• Requirements for onsite carshare -> a parking bay, mobile signal for the carshare vehicle, 24/7 controlled access. In front of/behind the security barrier. They provide different types of vehicles to meet different demands, such as vans to allow people to move houses.

Session 5: Cultural Landscape

Session: 5

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: Cultural Landscape

Format: Presentation

Presenter Name: Heather (Geelong City Council)

Summary

• Aboriginal people have settled in Moorabool and Barwon Rivers, but those lands were not preserved based on their cultural landscape.

• Evidence of heritage is limited to tangible things, however, consider the intangible method of First Nations Storytelling. First Nations' cultural heritage and identity are often framed through the western planning system and the inclusion as stakeholders.

• Strong People Strong Country Policy- developed and led by First Nations People. Introduces a re-framing where inclusion is explored through how the identity of the Traditional owners is dependent on the health of the Country and their environment.

• This is a shift away from policies that looked at inclusion from a stakeholder perspective, that in a way forced First Nations people to engage with the western/colonial planning system. How can policies support First Nations individuals that do not live in their Country, this is particularly common as a consequence of the Stolen Generation.

Session 5: Gender, Transport, and its Numerous Intersections

Session: 5

Room: Melbourne Room

Session Title: Gender, Transport, and its Numerous Intersections

Format: Open Discussion

Presenter Name: Zoe (Merri-bek), Elise (CrowdSpot), and Adam (Merri-bek)

(Photograghed by Benish

Summary

• Highly skewed and underrepresented numbers of women and non-binary people in cycling in Melbourne and Victoria. Removing the barriers to entry of bicycle riding

• The gender gap in cycling (Elise): Absence in policy for people that do not identify as men or women. We need to shift the conversation from increasing cycling opportunities for women to increasing the opportunity for anyone facing barriers. Some barriers include: safety, and raising children. Transport data should be provided with a gender breakdown.

• People ride to train stations when the alternatives are poor.

• Designing cross-community routes rather than just 'journeys to work'. There is no data on these journeys because they are currently not catered for. No safe infrastructure that allows women to give things a try and have the opportunity to "fail".

• Safety exists in many forms, including injury risk and the perceived safety of other people using the space.

• Lighting is a concern in footpath safety. Roads have lights, but footpaths do not. However, lighting is not the only concern for gender inclusion.

• Findings: Girls stopped using bicycles when moving from primary school to high school. Boys are given more freedom to travel to school independently.

• It's about pushing that market, activating new infrastructure, and making sure people are aware. Consider micro-mobility as a mitigating solution for last-mile, after-dark trips.

• Many people in typically female-dominated jobs will use scooters and won't cycle -

• E-cargo bike trials (Zoe): - Doing persona route mapping, rich heat map of trips women are choosing. Most people who haven't cycled or used cargo bikes are returning to cycling after having children. Mapping is showing routes taken, routes being avoided, and what streets young families and women are riding on. If we do more of these trials, we can target infrastructure and show where we should be investing it.

• Need quantitative and qualitative data - the stories of community members

Session 6: Reducing Carbon Emissions

Session: 6

Room: Portico Room

Session Title: Reducing Carbon Emissions

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: William McDougall

Summary

• North East Link, emissions saved only account for 3% of total emissions over 30 years of running the road.

• Coal exports are not being taken into account in our 'net zero' goals.

• Transport solutions: Currently planning for a sharp decline in emissions rather than linear descent. Where is the electricity coming from for electric transport?

• There is a lack of implementation ideas and no actual plan for emissions reduction.

• The AGL early closing of coal plants was an early win.

• Consider, Carbon pricing, and greater transparency in scope in emissions and materials (how they travel, where they come from). Onsets vs offsets. Incremental timelines rather than just 30 years.

• We need to encourage people and behaviour change and actively work towards emissions reduction. E.g. taxes and disincentives for driving SUVs in Norway or France.

• Educate about where super is investing in. Tangible and teaching people how they are affecting emissions. Small personal education campaigns. Who do you bank with etc.

• Private enterprise is likely to drive innovation more than government.

• Repurposing of EV batteries once reached the end of their ability to power vehicles.

• Priority should be making public transport the first choice.

• No money in behavioural change and a decrease in consumption is needed, that is where government needs to step in.

Session 6: Parking Minimums

Session: 6

Room: Melbourne Room

Session Title: Parking Minimums

Format: Discussion

Presenter Name: Lachlan Burke (Movement and Place Consulting)

Summary

• Parking minimums are set by the council and are resisted by the business owner.

• Parking is most of the time provided more than requirements.

• Making people use active transport would make parking opportunities for the people with issues.

• We need some kind of management if accessibility is being impacted by the lack of parking. The car parking minimums have also made some businesses apply for waivers to their complexity and expense for small businesses.